Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research
Attracted by the promise of a broader and more egalitarian sample of readers than published book reviews provide, researchers are increasingly scraping social reviewing platforms like Goodreads for data about readers’ behavior. Yet, treating online book reviews as direct proxies for readers and book...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2025-09-01
|
| Series: | Big Data & Society |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517251359229 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849249224983576576 |
|---|---|
| author | Yuerong Hu Jana Diesner Ted Underwood Zoe LeBlanc Glen Layne-Worthey John Stephen Downie |
| author_facet | Yuerong Hu Jana Diesner Ted Underwood Zoe LeBlanc Glen Layne-Worthey John Stephen Downie |
| author_sort | Yuerong Hu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Attracted by the promise of a broader and more egalitarian sample of readers than published book reviews provide, researchers are increasingly scraping social reviewing platforms like Goodreads for data about readers’ behavior. Yet, treating online book reviews as direct proxies for readers and books can be problematic, as they are socially and technically constructed artifacts shaped by platform dynamics, whether between developers and users, or book industry stakeholders and reviewers. To uncover these complexities, we computationally curated 331,211 self-identified incentivized book reviews to understand the growth of incentivized content, and how these purportedly equal-access social reviewing spaces are re-inscribing the inequalities of traditional book reviewing and publishing. Our findings underscore the necessity of critical examination of both online book reviewing and cultural datasets derived from social media platforms. With the growing restrictions on access to platform data for research, this study also demonstrates the potential for a mixed-method analysis of historical scraped datasets; an approach that will likely be of interest to many researchers working with cultural data moderated by black-box algorithms. With this method, our research reveals for the first time the scale of the phenomena of incentivized book reviews that is well known to users of Goodreads but remains largely anecdotal. Additionally, it illuminates the rise of sponsored content while contributing to broader discussions on computational approaches to digital economies of prestige and the responsible use of platform-mediated cultural datasets across disciplines. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-53d0963cd2c94375bebecf3763f671c8 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2053-9517 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-09-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Big Data & Society |
| spelling | doaj-art-53d0963cd2c94375bebecf3763f671c82025-08-20T03:57:39ZengSAGE PublishingBig Data & Society2053-95172025-09-011210.1177/20539517251359229Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly ResearchYuerong Hu0Jana Diesner1Ted Underwood2Zoe LeBlanc3Glen Layne-Worthey4John Stephen Downie5 Department for Information and Library Science, Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, USA School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA Department of English, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Champaign, IL, USAAttracted by the promise of a broader and more egalitarian sample of readers than published book reviews provide, researchers are increasingly scraping social reviewing platforms like Goodreads for data about readers’ behavior. Yet, treating online book reviews as direct proxies for readers and books can be problematic, as they are socially and technically constructed artifacts shaped by platform dynamics, whether between developers and users, or book industry stakeholders and reviewers. To uncover these complexities, we computationally curated 331,211 self-identified incentivized book reviews to understand the growth of incentivized content, and how these purportedly equal-access social reviewing spaces are re-inscribing the inequalities of traditional book reviewing and publishing. Our findings underscore the necessity of critical examination of both online book reviewing and cultural datasets derived from social media platforms. With the growing restrictions on access to platform data for research, this study also demonstrates the potential for a mixed-method analysis of historical scraped datasets; an approach that will likely be of interest to many researchers working with cultural data moderated by black-box algorithms. With this method, our research reveals for the first time the scale of the phenomena of incentivized book reviews that is well known to users of Goodreads but remains largely anecdotal. Additionally, it illuminates the rise of sponsored content while contributing to broader discussions on computational approaches to digital economies of prestige and the responsible use of platform-mediated cultural datasets across disciplines.https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517251359229 |
| spellingShingle | Yuerong Hu Jana Diesner Ted Underwood Zoe LeBlanc Glen Layne-Worthey John Stephen Downie Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research Big Data & Society |
| title | Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research |
| title_full | Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research |
| title_fullStr | Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research |
| title_full_unstemmed | Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research |
| title_short | Who decides what is read on Goodreads? Uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly Research |
| title_sort | who decides what is read on goodreads uncovering sponsorship and its implications for scholarly research |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517251359229 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yueronghu whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch AT janadiesner whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch AT tedunderwood whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch AT zoeleblanc whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch AT glenlayneworthey whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch AT johnstephendownie whodecideswhatisreadongoodreadsuncoveringsponsorshipanditsimplicationsforscholarlyresearch |